Addition of a .= operator

[Peter J. Holzer]

On 2023-05-24 08:51:19 +1000, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Wed, 24 May 2023 at 08:48, Peter J. Holzer <hjp-python at hjp.at> wrote:
> > Yes, that probably wasn't the best example. I sort of deliberately
> > avoided method chaining here to make my point that you don't have to
> > invent a new variable name for every intermediate result, but of course
> > that backfired because in this case you don't need a variable name at
> > all. I should have used regular function calls ...
> >
> 
> In the context of a .= operator, though, that is *in itself* an
> interesting data point: in order to find an example wherein the .=
> operator would be plausible, you had to make the .= operator
> unnecessary.

Another communication failure on my part, I'm afraid: I was going off on
a tangent about variable naming and didn't intend to show anything about
the usefulness (or lack thereof) of a .= operator.

        hp

-- 
   _  | Peter J. Holzer    | Story must make more sense than reality.
|_|_) |                    |
| |   | hjp at hjp.at         |    -- Charles Stross, "Creative writing
__/   | http://www.hjp.at/ |       challenge!"
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/attachments/20230524/240d90f1/attachment.sig>